Case law

Opinions from 1658 to today.

FiltersNJ

10,000+ results

0.51s

  • FDIC v. Birchwood Builders

    240 N.J. Super. 260 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 2, 1990

    We also find clearly without merit defendant's contention that a New York Statute of Limitations proscribes charging defendant's interest in the partnership with plaintiff's judgment. … While we need not resolve this issue on such grounds, in absence of a specific congressional intent to waive governmental immunity from state statutes of limitation, the contention of plaintiff's immunity from local statutes

    Cited 11 timesPublished
  • In re the Application of the Bond Printing Co.

    24 N.J. Misc. 215 · Monmouth County Circuit Court, N.J. · Jul 30, 1946

    The two statutes under consideration were clearly enacted for the protection of the newspaper business as a whole, and part of the protection provided was to require a newspaper to prove its stability by publishing continuously … The Red Bank Daily Standard had been established for a number of years in Bed Bank. It was legally qualified in Bed Bank.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • Winship v. Winship

    16 N.J. Eq. 107 · New Jersey Court of Chancery · Feb 15, 1863

    The guilt of the defendant is clearly *108 proved. … The wife qualifies, without denying the substance of the charge of collusion to obtain the divorce.

    Cited 0 timesPublished
  • D.L. v. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA

    District Court, D. New Jersey · Sep 14, 2021

    Defendant concedes that “its argument for absolute immunity [under Section 7] is contrary to the holdings of other judges within this District concerning medical malpractice matters involving federally qualified health … Accordingly, Defendant has failed to meet its burden of establishing absolute immunity under Section 7. c.

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Holmes v. Cavicchia

    29 N.J. Super. 434 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Feb 4, 1954

    App. 1941). *438 We find decisions holding that technical proof may be required to establish the alcoholic quantity of beer where there is evidence that the beverage was "qualified beer," i.e., spruce beer, small beer, ginger … Clearly, there was sufficient evidence to support the Director's findings that the appellants unlawfully had served the minors an alcoholic beverage in violation of the Regulation. The order is affirmed.

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • Myers v. Cave

    55 N.J. Super. 185 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 13, 1959

    The issue of statutory construction posed by this controversy is clearly drawn. It has not heretofore been passed on by our courts. … But we cannot find either in section 14 or elsewhere in the act an intent to qualify the unconditional remedies clearly granted the Board by the act against an application for payment of a default judgment, as specified in

    Cited 9 timesPublished
  • Roe v. Kervick

    42 N.J. 191 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Apr 20, 1964

    Clearly the Constitution would stand in the way. … It applies to any individual, association or corporation qualifying for the financial assistance under the general standards established therein.

    Cited 103 timesPublished
  • SMITH v. D'ILIO

    District Court, D. New Jersey · Jun 23, 2025

    “‘[T]he judicially created doctrine of qualified immunity’ shields governmental officials from suit and from liability if their conduct ‘does not violate clearly established statutory or constitutional rights of which a … The first prong of qualified immunity asks, “whether the facts, as viewed in the light most favorable to the plaintiff, show the violation of a legal right,” and the second prong asks, “whether that right was clearly established

    Cited 0 timesUnknown
  • Borden Company v. Freeman

    256 F. Supp. 592 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jun 10, 1966

    (а) Authorization to establish specifications. … purpose. ****** (б) Other poultry dishes and specialty items, (i) * * * Products * * * having less than the specified minimum poultry meat content, may use the “Kind” name in the product name, provided it is appropriately qualified

    Cited 10 timesPublished
  • State v. Sima

    142 N.J. Super. 187 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 28, 1976

    One whose life is in real danger, as evidenced by serious threats or earlier attacks, may perhaps qualify within the latter category but one whose concern is with the safety of his property, protectible by other means, clearly … may not so qualify.

    Cited 4 timesPublished
  • HARE EX REL. HARE v. Pennell

    37 N.J. Super. 558 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Oct 28, 1955

    Div. 1952), affirmed 11 N.J. 207 (1953), where the court considered R.S. 18:5-30 granting school districts immunity from liability for personal injuries resulting from the use of any public grounds, buildings or structures … When counsel for plaintiffs asked permission to question the child in order to qualify her, the court cut him off. The mother of the second child, Cheryl Taylor, testified she would shortly be nine-years-old.

    Cited 16 timesPublished
  • Bartholf v. Board of Review

    36 N.J. Super. 349 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Jul 1, 1955

    A. 43:21-4(e)) to establish, with respect to his base year, 17 base weeks as defined in N. J. S. … In fixing the qualifying requirement that a claimant establish 17 base weeks in his base year during which he has earned remuneration in employment (N. J. S.

    Cited 2 timesPublished
  • Florence v. Board of Chosen Freeholders

    657 F. Supp. 2d 504 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jun 30, 2009

    Here, the Fourth Amendment question is clearly serious to the conduct of the litigation in a practical and legal sense. … Finally, Burlington moved for summary judgment in favor of Warden Jule Cole in his individual capacity on qualified immunity grounds. That motion was denied with prejudice. Id. at 518 .

    Cited 4 timesPublished
  • Liptak v. Rite Aid, Inc.

    289 N.J. Super. 199 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Apr 2, 1996

    Liptak's alleged alcoholism was clearly not "a straightforward observation of a treating physician...." … Id. at 164 , 632 A. 2d 1264 . [7] The Clinic qualifies under the exception given the broad definition of the term "business."

    Cited 22 timesPublished
  • State v. Speare

    86 N.J. Super. 565 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Feb 25, 1965

    facts established. … We are satisfied that the contract in question did not qualify as newly discovered evidence calling for a new trial.

    Cited 22 timesPublished
  • International Flavors & Fragrances, Inc. v. Taxation Division Director

    5 N.J. Tax 617 · New Jersey Tax Court · Aug 4, 1983

    The regulation does weak *629 en the force of defendant’s position that attributed ownership such as plaintiff seeks here must be clearly and unmistakably reflected in the statute. … Clearly plaintiff possesses 100% of the “ownership of investment” in IFF-France and IFF-Brazil directly and through its wholly owned subsidiary IFF-Holland.

    Cited 16 timesPublished
  • In re the Right of the Grand Jury to Order Production of Records of Addonizio

    53 N.J. 107 · Supreme Court of New Jersey · Dec 16, 1968

    Moreover, the Attorney General is better situated to decide whether immunity should be granted when the witness gives some indication of the matters upon which immunity is sought. … And although immunity from use of evidence is less than an immunity from prosecution, still it is sound to require the witness to make a claim of privilege the court finds sufficient.

    Cited 3 timesPublished
  • State v. Corbisiero

    67 N.J. Super. 170 · New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · Mar 20, 1961

    As such, the ordinance is clearly invalid as a prior restraint on the exercise of First Amendment rights." … It is clear that the right to religious belief is absolute, but that the right to religious speech or activity may be qualified, albeit, only to a very limited degree.

    Cited 1 timesPublished
  • MICHAEL BESSASPARIS VS. THE TOWNSHIP OF BRIDGEWATER (L-1419-17, SOMERSET COUNTY AND STATEWIDE)

    New Jersey Superior Court Appellate Division · May 6, 2021

    at 385-387 (discussing application of qualified immunity in § 1983 case); Bayer v. Twp. of Union, 414 N.J Super. 238, 261 (App. … of federal qualified immunities and N.J.S.A. 59:3-14.

    Cited 0 timesUnpublished
  • Coon v. Liebmann Breweries, Inc.

    86 F. Supp. 333 · District Court, D. New Jersey · Jul 22, 1949

    There can be no doubt that throughout the period of his employment the petitioner was a qualified employee under the said contract. VII. … It may be conceded that as between the petitioner and the Union the petitioner was a temporary member, but it clearly appears from the undisputed testimony that he qualified for employment and was entitled to his position

    Cited 1 timesPublished

Ask Donna

Ask Donna

A word about cookies

We need a few to keep you signed in and the library working. The rest help us see which pages people use and where they get stuck. They stay off unless you say yes.